|
Originally Posted by Flytolive
(Post 2168732)
It is obvious that this is an emotional issue for you and that your complete lack of focus demonstrates that global climate change has become a proxy for everything that frustrates you politically. Good luck with that. I'll stick the opinion of the experts and the clear evidence that is overwhelming.
Poor little Fly. There you go with your projections again. You really can't help yourself, can you? So sad. You go right ahead and believe the opinion of "experts" who have a clear conflict of interest re: telling the truth vs. losing their funding (and their jobs), right along with all their data that has been cooked to skew the results. Just ignore expeditions getting stuck in ice that isn't supposed to be there, the unexplained "warming pause", etc, etc, etc. Meanwhile, unlike you, most Americans know when someone is ****ing on their boots but telling them it's raining. Gallup Poll: 75% in U.S. See Widespread Government Corruption http://content.gallup.com/origin/gal...gkb2ghoxjq.png
Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes
(Post 2169007)
It's like the passengers who won't put their seat belt on during flight or release it as soon as the wheels touch. No, it really isn't and that is a very poor analogy. However, it is VERY convenient to the alarmist's argument that "we won't know for sure if we are right until it's too late to do anything about it". Meanwhile, dire prediction after dire prediction has failed, giving rise to the convenient argument above (which didn't come about until said predictions began failing). Remember when "global warming" morphed into "climate change"?? Here's a fact you can hang your hat on with absolute certainty: "Global warming" is nothing more than a piece of socioeconomic ideology wherein "save the planet" = vote for democrats, who are more than willing to use taxpayer $$ to buy all the evidence (and votes) they need. |
NY Attorney General Eric Schneiderman refusing federal subpoena connected to Exxon Mobil investigation Wednesday, July 27, 2016 NEW YORK – New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman is refusing to comply with a Congressional Science Committee’s subpoena seeking records of his investigation into Exxon Mobil and man-made climate change. Attorney General Eric Schneiderman refusing federal subpoena connected to Exxon Mobil investigation Funny how the NY AG, a democrat, seeks to abuse the law to prosecute Exxon Mobile for "misleading the public on climate change" (of which there is no law against doing, even if it were true), but he won't comply with a legal federal subpoena when it doesn't fit his socio-political agenda. Ho hum. One set of rules for democrats (and Hillary), and a completely different set of rules for everyone else. |
Originally Posted by SayAlt
(Post 2169008)
Gallup Poll:
http://content.gallup.com/origin/gal...ojjpj6wnna.png http://content.gallup.com/origin/gal...-gj9o3jlaq.png
Originally Posted by SayAlt
(Post 2169314)
Funny how the NY AG, a democrat, seeks to abuse the law to prosecute Exxon Mobile for "misleading the public on climate change" (of which there is no law against doing, even if it were true)
|
lol
You sure about that? http://content.gallup.com/origin/gal...argkhxas6a.png
Originally Posted by Flytolive
(Post 2169326)
A securities lawyer you are not. It's not missed that, once again, you refuse to address the main point, in this case (no pun intended) that the NY AG is ignoring established law and refuses to respond to a legal, federal subpoena. |
|
Forbes Welcome
NASA Data: Global Warming Not Causing Any Polar Ice Retreat Updated data from NASA satellite instruments reveal the Earth’s polar ice caps have not receded at all since the satellite instruments began measuring the ice caps in 1979. Since the end of 2012, moreover, total polar ice extent has largely remained above the post-1979 average. The updated data contradict one of the most frequently asserted global warming claims – that global warming is causing the polar ice caps to recede. The timing of the 1979 NASA satellite instrument launch could not have been better for global warming alarmists. The late 1970s marked the end of a 30-year cooling trend. As a result, the polar ice caps were quite likely more extensive than they had been since at least the 1920s. Nevertheless, this abnormally extensive 1979 polar ice extent would appear to be the “normal” baseline when comparing post-1979 polar ice extent. Updated NASA satellite data show the polar ice caps remained at approximately their 1979 extent until the middle of the last decade. Beginning in 2005, however, polar ice modestly receded for several years. By 2012, polar sea ice had receded by approximately 10 percent from 1979 measurements. (Total polar ice area – factoring in both sea and land ice – had receded by much less than 10 percent, but alarmists focused on the sea ice loss as “proof” of a global warming crisis.) http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosph....withtrend.jpg A 10-percent decline in polar sea ice is not very remarkable, especially considering the 1979 baseline was abnormally high anyway. Regardless, global warming activists and a compliant news media frequently and vociferously claimed the modest polar ice cap retreat was a sign of impending catastrophe. Al Gore even predicted the Arctic ice cap could completely disappear by 2014. In late 2012, however, polar ice dramatically rebounded and quickly surpassed the post-1979 average. Ever since, the polar ice caps have been at a greater average extent than the post-1979 mean. Now, in May 2015, the updated NASA data show polar sea ice is approximately 5 percent above the post-1979 average. The frequency of polar ice cap stories may have abated, but the tone and content has not changed at all. Here are some of the titles of news items I pulled yesterday from the front two pages of a Google News search for “polar ice caps”: “Climate change is melting more than just the polar ice caps” “2020: Antarctic ice shelf could collapse” “An Arctic ice cap’s shockingly rapid slide into the sea” “New satellite maps show polar ice caps melting at ‘unprecedented rate’” The only Google News items even hinting that the polar ice caps may not have melted so much (indeed not at all) came from overtly conservative websites. The “mainstream” media is alternating between maintaining radio silence on the extended run of above-average polar ice and falsely asserting the polar ice caps are receding at an alarming rate. To be sure, receding polar ice caps are an expected result of the modest global warming we can expect in the years ahead. In and of themselves, receding polar ice caps have little if any negative impact on human health and welfare, and likely a positive benefit by opening up previously ice-entombed land to human, animal, and plant life. Nevertheless, polar ice cap extent will likely be a measuring stick for how much the planet is or is not warming. The Earth has warmed modestly since the Little Ice Age ended a little over 100 years ago, and the Earth will likely continue to warm modestly as a result of natural and human factors. As a result, at some point in time, NASA satellite instruments should begin to report a modest retreat of polar ice caps. The modest retreat – like that which happened briefly from 2005 through 2012 – would not be proof or evidence of a global warming crisis. Such a retreat would merely illustrate that global temperatures are continuing their gradual recovery from the Little Ice Age. Such a recovery – despite alarmist claims to the contrary – would not be uniformly or even on balance detrimental to human health and welfare. Instead, an avalanche of scientific evidence indicates recently warming temperatures have significantly improved human health and welfare, just as warming temperatures have always done. http://lolsalot.com/wp-content/uploa...rming-Meme.jpg |
|
|
|
|
Ho hum. Plenty of republican crooks out there, too. See: Jeff Flake, Lindsey Graham, etc.
I highly doubt anyone has ever said otherwise in this thread. I never have. Meanwhile... http://joeforamerica.com/wp-content/...LA-728x521.jpg |
You know what's really amazing, folks??
What's truly amazing is what we've seen in the last few months. Namely... A committed far-left socialist has FOR MONTHS been telling anyone who will listen that mainstream democrats have and are "rigging the system" and must be thrown out. Well....Guess what?? On the eve of the Democrat National Convention, Wikileaks released 20,000 emails taken from the DNC's own servers that PROVED Bernie Sanders was right all along...they had "rigged the game". Read: lied AND cheated their own people! It was so bad that it immediately forced the head of the DNC, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, to resign and step down (only to immediately get hired as a high-paid consultant with the Clinton campaign, of course!). And yet, in spite of all this truly unsurprising and ever-increasingly obvious truth, there are some who are so utterly incapable of individual independence and moral character that they simply don't care. Ethics and morals mean absolutely nothing to them, and all the while they preach and moan about political correctness and pretend to be moral authorities on everything from racism to protecting the planet. The truth is out now, the cat is out of the bag, and it won't be stuffed back in... "Global warming" (ie. climate change) is nothing more than an ideologically-driven economic redistribution scam.....fraud committed on a massive scale against the US taxpayers and global community...all in service to political power and money-hungry people with absolutely no morals whatsoever. Even Bernie Sanders himself ultimately sold-out his own followers, and this right after being vindicated on the eve of the DNC! The left is morally and ideologically bankrupt, with everything from sea ice that isn't supposed to be there to a failed socialist Venezuela proving it all beyond any reasonable doubts. Btw, you won't ever hear a single "true believer" ever address a single one of these issues, either. They will obfuscate, try to change the subject, pretend they didn't hear anything, blame the russians or Trump....everything BUT address any of the truths that have so utterly revealed the fully bleached reef of their ideology. Why? Because no one can refute the truth. All they can do is try to pretend it isn't there, staring them (and the rest of us) right in the face. |
Originally Posted by SayAlt
(Post 2170930)
Ho hum. Plenty of republican crooks out there, too. See: Jeff Flake, Lindsey Graham, etc.
Even Bernie Sanders himself ultimately sold-out his own... They will obfuscate, try to change the subject, pretend they didn't hear anything, blame the russians or Trump....everything The human capacity for self-delusion is almost limitless. You should buy yourself a mirror. |
No, you really don't see. All you do is project and assume. You now project that anyone I disagree with I must therefore think is a criminal (ex: like warmulists see Exxon and big oil), and you assume I support Trump (rather than oppose Hillary Clinton).
But this isn't about me. This thread is about a massive, global fraud being perpetrated to promote and push a morally bankrupt political ideology by completely self-serving leaders (and their media sycophants), all of whom have irrefutably been proven to be corrupt, abject liars. Fortunately, America and the rest of the world is waking up to the it/them, proving Abe Lincoln's timeless wisdom... "You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time." Btw, thanks for proving me right, again...
Originally Posted by SayAlt
(Post 2170930)
You won't ever hear a single "true believer" ever address a single one of these issues, either. They will obfuscate, try to change the subject, pretend they didn't hear anything, blame the russians or Trump....everything BUT address any of the truths that have so utterly revealed the fully bleached reef of their ideology.
|
Originally Posted by SayAlt
(Post 2170930)
You know what's really amazing, folks??
What's truly amazing is what we've seen in the last few months. Namely... A committed far-left socialist has FOR MONTHS been telling anyone who will listen that mainstream democrats have and are "rigging the system" and must be thrown out. Well....Guess what?? On the eve of the Democrat National Convention, Wikileaks released 20,000 emails taken from the DNC's own servers that PROVED Bernie Sanders was right all along...they had "rigged the game". Read: lied AND cheated their own people! It was so bad that it immediately forced the head of the DNC, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, to resign and step down (only to immediately get hired as a high-paid consultant with the Clinton campaign, of course!). And yet, in spite of all this truly unsurprising and ever-increasingly obvious truth, there are some who are so utterly incapable of individual independence and moral character that they simply don't care. Ethics and morals mean absolutely nothing to them, and all the while they preach and moan about political correctness and pretend to be moral authorities on everything from racism to protecting the planet. The truth is out now, the cat is out of the bag, and it won't be stuffed back in... "Global warming" (ie. climate change) is nothing more than an ideologically-driven economic redistribution scam.....fraud committed on a massive scale against the US taxpayers and global community...all in service to political power and money-hungry people with absolutely no morals whatsoever. Even Bernie Sanders himself ultimately sold-out his own followers, and this right after being vindicated on the eve of the DNC! The left is morally and ideologically bankrupt, with everything from sea ice that isn't supposed to be there to a failed socialist Venezuela proving it all beyond any reasonable doubts. Btw, you won't ever hear a single "true believer" ever address a single one of these issues, either. They will obfuscate, try to change the subject, pretend they didn't hear anything, blame the russians or Trump....everything BUT address any of the truths that have so utterly revealed the fully bleached reef of their ideology. Why? Because no one can refute the truth. All they can do is try to pretend it isn't there, staring them (and the rest of us) right in the face. A=B means that B is true. How does A=B? This post is the biggest logical fail I've seen in a long time. |
LOL
See what I mean, folks? You won't ever hear a single "true believer" ever address a single one of these issues, either. They will obfuscate, try to change the subject, pretend they didn't hear anything, blame the russians or Trump....everything BUT address any of the truths that have so utterly revealed the fully bleached reef of their ideology. |
Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes
(Post 2171213)
This post is the biggest logical fail I've seen in a long time.
|
Originally Posted by Flytolive
(Post 2171340)
flat earthers like him try to distract folks from the clear evidence. the jury is in on global climate change See how the warmulists need ME to be the issue and utterly refuse to address the cooked data, the inherent conflict of interest in research funding vs. said data, the complete failure of morals inside the political party that is pushing the warming agenda, etc., etc?? It's because they have no answers for these things. They know it's all a giant lie and fraud. They themselves are liars and frauds. So they distract, obfuscate, redirect, try to make skeptics the issue....ANYTHING to maintain their on-going narrative and theft of US taxpayers $$. http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Mpd1ozuoa6...Polar+Bear.jpg |
Flytolive, Iceman, Jamesnobrakes...
Prove me wrong. Show us all why there is no conflict of interest between global warming data and funding research... ...prove the data has NOT been cooked... ...demonstrate that the debate hasn't been rigged by the very people who just got caught rigging their own primary process... LOL Hint: you can't. All you can do is desperately try to change the subject. And everybody knows it. :D |
Originally Posted by SayAlt
(Post 2171417)
See how the warmulists need ME to be the issue
Did you get that mirror yet? |
Sorry, junior. It's not on me to prove your "experts" are lying, it's on you to prove your "experts" are telling the truth and NOT cooking the books as a direct result of the inherent conflict of interest between publicly funded research and what that research purports to show. And so far you are batting a big, fat "0", kiddo.
Originally Posted by Flytolive
(Post 2171444)
Your weak attempts to refute peer-reviewed scientific data with tripe from fringe sites without experts are baseless LOL Meanwhile, your "experts" are stuck.....once again!...in sea ice that they claimed wasn't supposed to be there. Ooopsie! Polar Voyage Meant To Prove Global Warming STUCK In Ice | The Daily Caller Ho hum. So much for your "peer reviewed data". http://meetmeunderthelibertytree.com...e-590-LI-2.jpg Lemme say it again since you don't seem to understand plain english...
Originally Posted by SayAlt
(Post 2171422)
Show us all why there is no conflict of interest between global warming data and publicly funded research... ...prove the data has NOT been cooked... ...demonstrate that the debate hasn't been rigged by the very people who just got caught rigging their own primary process... LOL Hint: you can't. All you can do is desperately try to change the subject. And everybody knows it. And yet you claim you can win debates? LMAO http://www.yaleclimateconnections.or...114_Lester.jpg |
Originally Posted by SayAlt
(Post 2171472)
Meanwhile, your "experts" are stuck.....once again!...in sea ice that they claimed wasn't supposed to be there.
https://www.theguardian.com/environm...global-warming |
SayAlt my esteemed colleague your rebuttal always consist of cartoons and 1 maybe scientist, I hope you are correct, but the science does not seem to agree. I do like the cartoons. Are you still sure that smoking does not kill. If nothing else the bantering back and forth allow others to review the arguments.:cool:
|
Originally Posted by SayAlt
(Post 2171472)
...a direct result of the inherent conflict of interest
https://www.theguardian.com/business...t-warning-1968 https://www.opensecrets.org/politici...?cid=N00005582 Perfect Score from Big Oil Awarded To Oklahoma's Inhofe Posted by sbopp at November 04, 2009 10:30 AM | Permalink Perfect Score from Big Oil Awarded To Oklahoma's Inhofe According to a little-known legislative scorecard and Voter Guide from the American Petroleum Institute, Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK) is the ideal legislator. The National Wildlife Federation discovered his MVP status with the oil industry’s top trade association, and they have issued a limited-edition trading card to commemorate it. The card highlights some of the Senator’s career milestones, including: •Sen. Inhofe and his leadership PAC have received $2,182,631 from the oil & gas industries since 1998, according to OpenSecrets.org. During that time, America’s foreign oil imports have increased 21 percent. •Sen. Inhofe took to the Senate floor in 2003 to call global warming “the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people.” This recognition from Big Oil came as Sen. Inhofe, a climate-change denier, organized a boycott of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, which had been working on the Kerry-Boxer clean energy bill. Concerned that some Republicans might be willing to engage in some bipartisan compromise on it, Sen. Inhofe has chosen to organize the Republican members of his committee and obstruct the entire process by walking out. “Senator Inhofe has taken his team off the field before the real action has even started. Behind the scenes, you can be sure Big Oil is giving Sen. Inhofe a standing ovation,” said Jeremy Symons, senior vice president of the National Wildlife Federation. “The oil industry has led a multi-million dollar assault on clean energy and climate legislation to protect its profits at the expense of America’s energy security. Now, Sen. Inhofe is once again coming through in the clutch for Big Oil.” Sen. Inhofe told reporters that Republicans will not return to debate the climate bill until a proper EPA analysis is done. Senator Boxer (D-CA), meanwhile, said the EPA had already done a two-week analysis of the Kerry-Boxer bill, which came on top of the five-week review of the House-passed bill — and the two bills are “90 percent similar.” Such facts would not stand in the way of Sen. Inhofe’s plans. Keep in mind that it was Sen. Inhofe who bragged about opposing health care legislation, saying last summer at a town hall meeting, “I don’t have to read it, or know what’s in it. I’m going to oppose it anyways.” |
http://endtimeinfo.com/wp-content/up...heating-up.jpg
Let me know when you figure out how the taxpayers are funding big oil as democrats are doing with the green energy lobby, hmmkay? Speaking of, funny how the gov't taxes every gallon of gas big oil sells, but "alternative energy" gets tax breaks. Who is paying who, again? http://www.renewamerica.com/images/c...1117caruba.jpg |
See here, folks? They just can't help themselves. They are utterly and in every way morally void...
The Reuters/Ipsos polling team announced Friday that they are dropping the “Neither” option from their presidential preference polls after their tracking polls showed a 17-point swing in favor of the Republican nominee Donald J. Trump, exposing the “Secret Trump Voters” Democrats fear. Political polling pioneer Pat Caddell said the Reuters news service was guilty of an unprecedented act of professional malpractice after it announced Friday it has dropped the “Neither” option from their presidential campaign tracking polls and then went back and reconfigured previously released polls to present different results with a reinterpretation of the “Neither” responses in those polls. “This comes as close as I have ever seen to cooking the results,” said the legendary pollster and political consultant. “I suppose you can get away with it in polling because there are no laws. But, if this was accounting, they would put them in jail.” “What they have done is unprecedented, he said. “They have now gone back and changed their results.” “This idea of ‘We need a poll to give the result we want’ to fit either our ideological or political needs is beyond dangerous,” he said. “It is dangerous because it drives the news coverage and it is all by design now, which is why everyone is in such shock at what Reuters did.” Pat Caddell Blasts Reuters' Back-Rigging Polls to Show Clinton Up But they aren't cooking the climate data...oh no! You can trust them, right? |
A Breitbart article about Pat Cadell and presidential polls. Classic. What does it have to do with global climate change? Who knows. Distract, distract, distract.
Oh no . . . Obama is doooooomed!!!!!!!!!!! (Don’t worry, it’s just Pat Caddell and Doug Schoen talking) by Andrew Gelman on November 16, 2012 Political strategists Pat Caddell and Doug Schoen report that Romney has a 12-point lead in Missouri and a 4-point lead in North Carolina. Is it even possible for Obama to win in the Electoral College without Missouri and North Carolina? Probably not. And Obama is only leading by 1 point in Florida. Sure, that’s better than trailing by 1 point in Florida, but still, it’s cause for worry! Caddell and Schoen have the secret: What voters are looking for—and particularly what swing voters, independents, and disillusioned Obama voters are looking for—is a new direction for America based on fiscal discipline, a balanced budget, and economic growth and leadership. What about polls that show voters are much more concerned with employment and the economy than with fiscal discipline and a balanced budget? Caddell and Schoen don’t care about those particular polls. After all, they report: More than anyone else in this race, Paul Ryan has spoken of the need for fiscal discipline and economic growth—two themes that have been largely absent from the Obama-Biden campaign—which explains a large part of the Ryan-inspired Romney bump. Good point, and good catch on their part. Ryanmania. Also this bit: Poll after poll has shown that while voters embrace the idea of higher taxes on the rich, it does not translate into votes. . . . nothing would appeal to independents and swing voters more than if the president were to embrace the findings of the 2010 Simpson-Bowles deficit-reduction commission . . . Jeez . . . it almost makes you wonder why Bowles and Simpson didn’t just run for president and vice-president themselves. Caddell and Schoen have the ticket: The only way Mr. Obama can capitalize on Mr. Clinton’s endorsement is if he channels President Clinton and outlines a balanced-budget plan of his own that speaks directly about the need to reduce spending and to introduce entitlement reform in a humane and rational way. That would appeal to swing voters, and maybe just win the election. “Entitlement reform” . . . yeah, that’s right. Tell the voters you’ll cut their Social Security benefits, that’ll win election after election, every time. And Caddell and Schoen are Democratic pollsters, too. This really is scary news for the O-man. Seriously, though, I haven’t seen advice this bad since the Democrats were told that they lost the House in 1994 because they weren’t liberal enough. P.S. Also this delightful bit from Caddell’s wikipedia entry: According to researchers, Caddell had wide influence in the Carter White House, and was the chief advocate of what later became known as Carter’s “malaise speech.” Sounds like a political expert to me. As for Doug Schoen, see here and here. Look. If you think entitlement reform is a good idea, fine, go for it. Praise the courage of politicians who support cutting social security, reforming private pensions and state obligations, talk about the long-term benefits of having a sustainable long-term path. But to claim it’s a vote-winner . . . give me a break. Even Mitt Romney didn’t go for that one. P.P.S. Let me put it another way. I respect that qualitative insights are important and that there’s a role for pundits who know the politicians, who know the voters, and who can do more than simply crunch the numbers. But Caddell and Schoen are supposed to be pollsters. That’s their professional life, and here they are just making stuff up. What’s the point of that? Are they adding any value at all? I don’t think so. The WSJ would be better off running old Art Buchwald and William F. Buckley columns. P.P.P.S. Yes, I realize that the Caddell and Schoen article actually ran a couple months ago. I just thought it would be more amusing to write this post in the present tense. |
|
|
Originally Posted by iceman49
(Post 2171583)
SayAlt my esteemed colleague, Are you still sure that smoking does not kill? Are you still certain the climate scientists aren't cooking the data to keep their research funding flowing?
Originally Posted by Flytolive
(Post 2171633)
A Breitbart article about Pat Cadell and presidential polls. Classic. What does it have to do with global climate change?
Originally Posted by Flytolive
(Post 2171654)
http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
Ho hum. As usual, nothing in there that addresses anything I keep mentioning, such as the hypocrisy of warmists (like people who believe in global warming but continue to fly airplanes in spite of it, for instance <presumably jets, no less>), or the conflict of interest between taxpayer-funded research and any kind of data that shows it's unnecessary, or the plethora of failed prediction after failed prediction, or how the warmulists are now attempting to use the courts to silence their critics and illegally prosecute companies they've hated for decades, etc., etc. In other words, par for your course. |
|
"Dark Money" Funds Climate Change Denial Effort - Scientific American
"Dark Money" Funds Climate Change Denial Effort A Drexel University study finds that a large slice of donations to organizations that deny global warming are funneled through third-party pass-through organizations that conceal the original funder By Douglas Fischer, The Daily Climate on December 23, 2013 The largest, most-consistent money fueling the climate denial movement are a number of well-funded conservative foundations built with so-called "dark money," or concealed donations, according to an analysis released Friday afternoon. The study, by Drexel University environmental sociologist Robert Brulle, is the first academic effort to probe the organizational underpinnings and funding behind the climate denial movement. It found that the amount of money flowing through third-party, pass-through foundations like DonorsTrust and Donors Capital, whose funding cannot be traced, has risen dramatically over the past five years. In all, 140 foundations funneled $558 million to almost 100 climate denial organizations from 2003 to 2010. https://www.theguardian.com/environm...denier-funding |
SayAlt: re statement of smoking....
Over his political career Gov. Mike Pence (R-IN) has consistently carried the tobacco industry’s water, denying the dangers of cigarettes, opposing government regulation, and slashing smoking cessation efforts. In return, they rewarded him with more than $100,000 in campaign donations. In 2000, Gov. Mike Pence (R-IN), then running for an open U.S. House seat, came out against a proposed settlement between government and the tobacco industry, calling it “big government.” In a shocking editorial, he wrote: “Time for a quick reality check. Despite the hysteria from the political class and the media, smoking doesn’t kill.” Pence acknowledged that smoking is not “good for you,” but claimed that two-thirds of smokers do not die from smoking related illness and “9 out of ten smokers do not contract lung cancer.” He warned of a slippery-slope in which government would soon seek to discourage fatty foods, caffeine, and SUVs. In a debate that September, his Democratic opponent pressed him on the suggestion that smoking does not cause cancer and noted his contributions from tobacco companies. According to the Indianapolis Star’s coverage of the exchange, “Pence clarified that he wrote that there was no causal link medically identifying smoking as causing lung cancer.” While cigarette manufacturers might have been still claiming that there was not causal link between smoking and lung cancer, medical science had settled the question years earlier. A landmark report by the U.S. Surgeon General had documented the link — in 1964. After the debate, the paper reported, Pence acknowledged he had received an estimated $5,000 and $10,000 in contributions from tobacco companies. His actual total was already at least $13,000 in contributions from the political action committees for Brown & Williamson, Philip Morris, R.J. Reynolds, and US Tobacco, according to Political MoneyLine data reviewed by ThinkProgress. A May 2000 letter from the Reynolds PAC to Pence, now available in the Truth Tobacco Industry Documents archive archives, conveyed a $1,000 check and praised his “position on issues important to our company.” Apparently some still think that smoking does not kill, are you sure that is not whats happening with the climate change deniers? |
Notice again, folks, how the warmulists must distract, obfuscate, redirect...ANYTHING but answer the questions put to them?? Note how they are DESPERATE to get off the defensive and make the topic anything BUT lying, manipulating democrat politicians and their flunkys using taxpayer $$ that doesn't belong to them to fund their climate change religion??
Here we go yet again. :rolleyes:
Originally Posted by Flytolive
(Post 2171805)
Assuming that's all true (a very big assumption)...that's not taxpayer $$, is it? Those are private funds, right? You DO understand the difference, don't you, Einstein? Btw, just clarifying who I'm dealing with here...you are a hypocrite, right?...still flying airplanes and driving cars?
Originally Posted by iceman49
(Post 2171833)
Over his political career Gov. Mike Pence (R-IN) has consistently carried the tobacco industry’s water, denying the dangers of cigarettes Now answer the questions about this blatant and obvious conflict of interest... http://joeforamerica.com/wp-content/...LA-728x521.jpg |
Look who was trying to help Koch Industries out with their pilot needs on this forum.
Did you ever fly or work for the Koch brothers or their company?
Originally Posted by SayAlt
(Post 1882794)
In 2013, Forbes called it the second largest privately held company in the United States (after Cargill), with an annual revenue of $115 billion :eek::eek:, down from the largest in 2006. If Koch Industries were a public company in 2013, it would have ranked 17 in the Fortune 500.
Qualifications (Work Experience/Skills & Education) At least 2,500 hours of flight time is required At least 500 hours of flight in a multi-engine turbine aircraft Must be capable of passing and maintaining an FAA First Class physical Must possess Airline Transport Pilot (ATP). Must be capable of obtaining a Lear 45 type rating within one year of employment High School Diploma or equivalent Must possess a valid, current pilot license Must Possess a valid, current driver’s license Must possess a valid , current passport Available to work holidays, weekends, travel overnight with no fixed schedule and on-call status Must be able to successfully complete a flight simulator evaluation prior to offer This position is subject to an annual “Wellness Profile” Must be able to lift 50 pounds, with or without a reasonable accommodation Preferred 3,000 TT, 1,500hr PIC in multi-engine aircraft with r 500hr in multi-engine turbine aircraft Lear 45/Challenger 300 Type rating Associate or Bachelor Degree 3 years Previous Corporate Aviation Experience Salary and benefits commensurate with experience https://kochcareers.taleo.net/career...4&src=JB-10082 |
Your attempts to deflect and distract are as pathetic as they are blatantly obvious, Mr. Hypocritical "I 'Flytolive' but believe in man-made global warming".
You do understand the difference between private funds and taxpayer $$, don't you Einstein?? You CAN appreciate that you are entitled to fund climate research with your own money as much as you like, but you are NOT entitled to use taxpayer $$ to do it, right?? |
<<<<<<<<crickets>>>>>>>>>>
. |
Originally Posted by SayAlt
(Post 2171858)
You do understand the difference between private funds and taxpayer $$, don't you Einstein??
Originally Posted by SayAlt
(Post 2171858)
You CAN appreciate that you are entitled to fund climate research with your own money as much as you like, but you are NOT entitled to use taxpayer $$ to do it, right??
It was so nice of you to post a pilot job opening for Koch Industries on this forum. Did you work for the Kochs or Koch Industries? https://www.theguardian.com/environm...-their-borders |
Originally Posted by Flytolive
(Post 2171891)
I do, but the difference is irrelevant So pathetic, sad, and intellectually dishonest. You should say that with a german accent, you know. After all, alarmists like the NY AG are attempting to criminally prosecute Exxon for using it's own private funds to "mislead the public" re: an unproven theory! Oh well. Hypocritical fascists will be hypocritical fascists. "Do as I say, not as I do!"
Originally Posted by Flytolive
(Post 2171891)
Wrong. Under the constitution of the United States Congress appropriates funds for all kinds of research. https://illuminutti.files.wordpress....ate_change.jpg http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...hange-bullies/ |
Wow, you just cannot manage to stay focused and unemotional about the issue of global climate change. You resort to calling people fascists and comparing scientists to Nazis. Such silliness is the clear sign of a tortured argument.
And now we know that you went to the trouble of posting a pilot job listing for none other that Koch Industries about which you seem reluctant to address. Since Koch Industries is one of the biggest funders of global climate change denial we have to wonder if you are representing their interests in some form or fashion. What a great idea to use social media to spread misinformation and propaganda. What's funny is the extent of your projection, illogic and misunderstanding of basic science. If that is the case the next time they should send a more well versed errand boy. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:52 PM. |
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands